Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Google Businesses

Google Forcing Some Remote Workers To Come Back 3 Days a Week or Lose Their Jobs (cnbc.com) 83

Posted by msmash from the my-way-or-highway dept.
Five years removed from the onset of the Covid pandemic, Google is demanding that some remote employees return to the office if they want to keep their jobs and avoid being part of broader cost cuts at the company. CNBC reports: Several units within Google have told remote staffers that their roles may be at risk if they don't start showing up at the closest office for a hybrid work schedule, according to internal documents viewed by CNBC. Some of those employees were previously approved for remote work.

Google Forcing Some Remote Workers To Come Back 3 Days a Week or Lose Their Jobs More | Reply

Google Forcing Some Remote Workers To Come Back 3 Days a Week or Lose Their Jobs

Comments Filter:
  • There is a lot of Long Covid patients hanging on by a thread using remote work to stay in work who are unable to go into the office. The numbers now suffering are truly ridiculous and only getting worse. We were talking 400million in 2023 but its only grown since then and most of the studies in the past year are absurd numbers. This is going to cause a lot of disability issues for people who need that remote work as an accommodation. So far every company that has tried to force this has backtracked because

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by martin-boundary ( 547041 )
      The population of the USA is projected to be 347million in 2025.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      There is a lot of Long Covid patients hanging on by a thread using remote work to stay in work who are unable to go into the office. The numbers now suffering are truly ridiculous and only getting worse. We were talking 400million in 2023 but its only grown since then and most of the studies in the past year are absurd numbers. This is going to cause a lot of disability issues for people who need that remote work as an accommodation. So far every company that has tried to force this has backtracked because the consequences have been severe in loss of staff to competitors and ultimately widespread ignoring of the policy.

      A growing problem that has hardly captured a headline? How do 400 million simply slip under the radar? Haven't hardly heard a word about the long COVID problem getting worse. But the amount of spoiled insufferable idiots raised with participation trophies instead of father figures who have demanded an entire neurodivergent movement be created to bend and warp the “modern” world to meet every introverted desire? Yeah that got worse. A LOT worse.

      Am I denying people are suffering? No. Is soc

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tsqr ( 808554 )

        A growing problem that has hardly captured a headline? How do 400 million simply slip under the radar? Haven't hardly heard a word about the long COVID problem getting worse.

        Is it possible that yours is one of the few radars it's slipped under? I can help you with that. [yalemedicine.org]

        That's not to say that there aren't a lot of whiny, helicopter-parented ex-children out there who believe they merit special treatment because they've always received special treatment. From my own personal observations, they aren't very successful when released into the wild. But long COVID is a real thing, and it's pretty nasty.

  • Google is a terrible company (Score:3, Insightful)

    by GrahamJ ( 241784 ) on Wednesday April 23, 2025 @11:05PM (#65326963)

    In case being a privacy invading advertising monopolist wasn't enough...

  • Work ethic issues. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by GotNoRice ( 7207988 ) on Wednesday April 23, 2025 @11:25PM (#65326985)
    There are many people who are incredibly dedicated to their jobs, even while working remotely. I truly feel for these people and hope that they are identified and given exceptions where appropriate. But there are also clear work ethic issues associated with remote work. Just another one of those issues where a group of people trying to exploit the system end up ruining it for everyone. Fact is, there ARE a lot of people who love remote work *specifically because* they can practically ghost their job and always do the absolute minimum to not get fired. It's a lot easier to get away with this when you aren't in an office with other real people. Just like all of the kids who loved remote schooling during covid, because for all intents and purposes, it was like having a year (or more) off of school.

    • Re:Work ethic issues. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by gizmo2199 ( 458329 ) on Wednesday April 23, 2025 @11:29PM (#65326993) Homepage

      Most software development is done by ultra-remote workers in India.
      Good luck getting them to come in to your office 3 days a week!
      But somehow execs are rewarded for using those remote workers?!

    • Iâ(TM)ve seen the same. Some people are very productive from home, others get very little done. Most managers hate firing people and slackers can get away with minimal work for a long time. (But word does get around).

      Of course many people have jobs that canâ(TM)t be done from home, so to them people complaining about 3 days a week at work donâ(TM)t get a lot of sympathy.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Bert64 ( 520050 )

        Of course many people have jobs that canâ(TM)t be done from home, so to them people complaining about 3 days a week at work donâ(TM)t get a lot of sympathy.

        Different jobs have different conditions, things you should have considered when choosing a career path.
        Also for those who do still have to travel, removing millions of unnecessary commuters makes the journey a lot better - its the difference between an hour in traffic or a 30 mins easy drive, or having a seat on the train instead of having to stand for an hour. Long term it also serves to rebalance property prices so that you don't have to pay exorbitant prices to live close to your workplace.

        Three days vs

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Bert64 ( 520050 )

        Iâ(TM)ve seen the same. Some people are very productive from home, others get very little done. Most managers hate firing people and slackers can get away with minimal work for a long time. (But word does get around).

        Take out "from home"...
        Some people are productive, some people are not. The location where they work has very little impact on that, it's just attracted more scrutiny and forms a convenient excuse. Those people who slack off at home were almost certainly slacking off in the office too only you were using a flawed "attendance" methodology to measure productivity.
        I've encountered MANY people who arrive early, spend all day in the office and then leave late, but still don't get much done. If HR are measuring a

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Bert64 ( 520050 )

      There are work ethic issues associated with some people. These people will slack off wether they're in an office or not. I've known countless people who spend an entire day in an office and still fail to get their work done, just as i know many people who work remotely and get their work done reliably.

      If someone is just going to slack off then they need to be fired irrespective of where they work, removing or limiting remote work for everyone is just bad all round (extra costs for the company, extra costs a

      • Also many kids hate school because they suffer bullying and peer pressure there. Having remote schooling completely eliminates that.

        US schools seem to encourage bullying and other poor behavior. Having gone through multiple school systems, both me and immediate family, US schools are the worst, hands down.

    • >There are many people who are incredibly dedicated to their jobs, even while working remotely. I truly feel for these people and hope that they are identified and given exceptions where appropriate. But there are also clear work ethic issues associated with remote work.

      They won't get exceptions. Just went through this at my employer.

      • I had all 7 managers and 9 architects sign a written petition at IBM Cloud Classic to not lay me off in September 2024 until December 2024, after the major guzzle migration project I was the architect and lead of was deployed, as they felt the project would quickly fail and they'd lose major billion-dollar contracts due to the guzzle vulnerabilities.

        CEO Arvind rejected the plea. I was laid off for being more than 50 miles from an IBM office. I had started during COVID-19 and had a written and approved 100%
    • > do the absolute minimum to not get fired I don't understand the problem. That sounds like they're meeting the requirements of the job then. If you want more out of people, that would be a different set of requirements, no?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tsqr ( 808554 )

        do the absolute minimum to not get fired I don't understand the problem. That sounds like they're meeting the requirements of the job then.

        Yes, they're meeting the minimum requirements of the job, which in general means doing the minimum to do what you've been directed to do and nothing more. I've worked with drones like that. Don't take any initiative. Don't identify any issues. Avoid acquiring new skills. Don't seek interesting assignments. And don't complain when you get the absolute minimum pay raise at review time, or no raise at all. You can always leave and get a job somewhere else, and you're sure to get glowing references. Sounds like

        • Alternately you can be a high performer and still get no pay raise. Having nothing to do with your performance, company says no raise because we don't have it in the budget. We promised to buy back a certain investor's stock, and that's where your raise went. Why make the effort if the rewards for hard work keep decreasing, and each year you see your compensation decrease because the company shifts more benefits costs to employees? Why does everyone try to look like they're doing 110%?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by khchung ( 462899 )

      Fact is, there ARE a lot of people who love remote work *specifically because* they can practically ghost their job and always do the absolute minimum to not get fired. It's a lot easier to get away with this when you aren't in an office with other real people.

      Hahaha, somehow, this wasn't even a consideration when outsourcing jobs to India. But it became very important when it comes to American workers, including those who originally came from India.

      Umm... does that mean Indians in India have great work ethics, but somehow lost it all after coming to America? Or was work ethic not a real reason at all and just an excuse to force American workers to suffer so they will quit on their own?

    • There are many people who are incredibly dedicated to their jobs, even while working remotely. I truly feel for these people and hope that they are identified and given exceptions where appropriate. But there are also clear work ethic issues associated with remote work. Just another one of those issues where a group of people trying to exploit the system end up ruining it for everyone. Fact is, there ARE a lot of people who love remote work *specifically because* they can practically ghost their job and always do the absolute minimum to not get fired. It's a lot easier to get away with this when you aren't in an office with other real people. Just like all of the kids who loved remote schooling during covid, because for all intents and purposes, it was like having a year (or more) off of school.

      The thing I can't really wrap my head around with this shit is why the corporate world is so enamored with the idea that they need to enforce the same rules on *EVERYONE* when they have clear indicators that some individuals are flaunting the current arrangement. I know at my workplace we had a lot of remote work during the pandemic, and *EVERYONE* was recalled when two people were caught during logged-in hours posting their outings on Facebook. They had proof who was fucking it up, and proof that work was

    • there are also clear work ethic issues associated with remote work

      We have a real problem with "work ethic" in general in the United States. Let me tell a quick story.

      A hotel hires a room cleaner. They tell her the expectation is that each room cleaner will clean 6 rooms each shift. She starts her shift at 8 AM, and works hard, and fast, and efficiently and effectively cleans 6 rooms. She works very hard because she, as a single mom, wants to be home to care for her young children when they get home from school at 2:30. She goes to her boss at 2 PM and tells the boss she

    • It's a lot easier to get away with this when you aren't in an office with other real people.

      Because nobody ever figured out how to look busy while doing jack shit in an office in the last 50 years.

      You sound like someone with control issues.

  • Live by company rules or else. I never had a chance to do remote work from home. Retired after almost 48 years. 35 years at one job and 13 at the last. Let's see if anyone can get close to my 35 years. Wimps...

    • Let's see if anyone can get close to my 35 years. Wimps...

      Close to? I can beat it - over 35 years in my current job

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Targon ( 17348 )

      You make the point for why what Google is doing is wrong very well. Because you had a job that didn't allow you to work remotely, the very idea of working remote is alien to you. The very idea that you can work outside of a company office and still be productive might shock you. You must have known about people who get paid to take clients out for meals, or even for entertainment, it's a part of the job, and it's not all done in the office. So, what if you can do your entire job from outside of the

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by flippy ( 62353 )
      I can only speak for myself, but my issue with this is that the company (Google in this case) feels free to change the rules when they feel like it. Not necessarily based on actual job performance. If a company decided to do that to me, based on a non-performance-related evaluation, I'd seriously be looking to leave. I am not even commenting on remote work here. Is the employee living up to their end of the bargain, job-wise? Are they diligent about performing their job duties in a high-quality way, in what
  • In a nutshell, this is yet another stupid organization who does not understand that not everybody is an extrovert; and that forcing introverts to be in the office kills their performance. Organizations led by such ignorant morons might just as well advise that introverts need not apply.

  • One way to handle this situation equitably is to allow high performers to work at home and require low performers to come into the office n days per week. So, say a company rates people on a 1-5 scale, with '1' being an underperformer, '3' being average, and '4' & '5' being outstanding performers, anyone with a rating of '3' or less has to come into the office. That gives the average and low performers an incentive to improve to gain the perk of working from home.

Slashdot Top Deals

egrep patterns are full regular expressions; it uses a fast deterministic algorithm that sometimes needs exponential space. -- unix manuals

Close